Now that a ceasefire has been declared following the bombing of Iran’s main nuclear sites, it seems like a good time to review Israel’s goals and actions from both an actual and a possible perspective.

When the war with Hamas began 19 months ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quite clear about his aims: to eliminate Hamas militarily, and to effect the safe return of the 240 hostages. The first of these goals clearly took precedence. Israel began a prolonged bombing campaign that has killed over 56,000 Gazans (approximately 20,000 of them women and children), and damaged or destroyed two-thirds of the buildings in the enclave.

Worldwide pressure to end the bombings mounted, but Israel has justified them, and the resulting massive civilian death toll, on the grounds that it was necessary to annihilate Hamas as a threat to Israel’s very existence. Civilian casualties were defended as inevitable collateral damage, given Hamas’ practice of hiding fighters among the civilian population.

During the fall of 2024, Israel began widening the scope of its military activities beyond Gaza. Incursions on the ground and in the air were made into Syria, the West Bank, Lebanon and Yemen. This expansion of the war created a momentous change. Israel was no longer one participant among others, but rather a regional superpower.

Its intelligence for identifying targets, unmatched anywhere in the region, includes satellite-based surveillance and, most recently, AI-enhanced facial recognition, enabling it to pinpoint buildings and people with unprecedented accuracy. Several weeks ago, Israel claimed it had killed a senior Hamas official and his family in his tent.

Hamas’ fighting ability has perhaps been halved, but reports suggest it is already rebuilding its forces with new recruits. Furthermore, Israel’s intense bombing campaign appears to be backfiring. Simply put, there will soon be no identifiable buildings to target, merely piles of rubble. Israel has recently let it be known that it is calling up large numbers of reservists, perhaps indicating that it is shifting to a more ground-based strategy.

Meanwhile, about 20 hostages remain in captivity. The rest, aside from a limited number who have been exchanged for Palestinian prisoners, are presumed to have died. Ongoing negotiations to free the residue of those hostages who are still alive are currently caught up in conditions for peace, with Hamas demanding that Israel agree to a permanent ceasefire and Israel refusing to do so.

Given the enormous toll in lives Israel’s overall strategy has produced, how might its goals change? First, Israel could negotiate a permanent ceasefire with Hamas, including its withdrawal from Gaza. This would bring about a measure of peace. It would also meet Hamas’ main condition for releasing the remaining hostages.

Second, Israel could commit to blocking any efforts by ultra-orthodox right-wing settlers to take advantage of the rebuilding of Gaza. This, along with other actions, might help to finally open the way for a two-state solution.

If Israel were to commit to these ends, it would go a long way to restoring the respect and support of much of the rest of the world.